Diddy Says Prosecutors Misused Mann Act With Wrong Definition of Prostitution
Diddy is not going down without a fight. The music mogul is now claiming prosecutors are stretching definitions way too far in their effort to keep his Mann Act conviction…
Diddy is not going down without a fight. The music mogul is now claiming prosecutors are stretching definitions way too far in their effort to keep his Mann Act conviction standing.
In new legal documents obtained by TMZ, Diddy’s team says the government is playing loose with the word “prostitution.” They argue the court should rely on the 1910 meaning of the word, since that is when the Mann Act was created.
According to the outlet, Diddy said, back then, “a prostitute was a woman who had sex outside marriage.” He says today’s definition—sex for hire—is not what Congress had in mind more than a century ago.
Diddy also argues prosecutors never really proved he paid male escorts to sleep with his girlfriends. Instead, he claims the men were paid only for their time. He insists he was just a voyeur and maintains, in his words, that “that’s kosher.”
The Bigger Picture
The case has already been a rollercoaster. Diddy was acquitted on July 2 of racketeering and sex trafficking charges. But the jury did find him guilty on two lesser counts of transporting people for prostitution under the Mann Act.
He quickly filed a motion asking for an acquittal or a new trial. Prosecutors opposed, and now Diddy is doubling down with this new filing.
What’s Next
Judge Arun Subramanian will decide if Diddy’s arguments are enough to overturn the conviction or trigger a new trial. The clock is ticking—Diddy’s sentencing date is set for October 3.
